Physical Activity Recommendations: An Alternative Approach Using Energy Expenditure

• Autores: Lanay M. Mudd, Ann P. Rafferty, Mathew J. Reeves, James M. Pivarnik
• Localización: Medicine & Science in Sports & exercise: Official Journal of the American College of Sports Medicine, ISSN 0195-9131, Vol. 40, Nº. 10, 2008, págs. 1757-1763
• Idioma: inglés
• Texto completo no disponible (Saber más ...)
• Dialnet Métricas: 1 Cita
• Resumen

  • Most adults do not meet the American College of Sports Medicine and Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (ACSM/CDC) physical activity recommendations. Even fewer meet the more extreme Institute of Medicine (IOM) physical activity recommendations. Compliance with either recommendation has been conventionally assessed by combining frequencies and durations of self-reported activities. Leisure-time energy expenditure is a cumulative measure of activity that offers an alternative method of defining compliance.

    Purposes: To calculate the leisure-time energy expenditure of adults complying with the ACSM/CDC or the IOM physical activity recommendations determined by conventional measures and to reexamine compliance with the IOM recommendation using energy expenditure criteria.

    Methods: National, cross-sectional data from the 2000 Behavioral Risk Factor Surveillance System determined the mode, frequency, and duration of up to two leisure-time activities performed by adults. Four mutually exclusive activity groups (Non-, Low-, ACSM/CDC-, and IOM-Active) were defined on the basis of frequencies and durations of reported activities. Leisure-time energy expenditure (kcal[middle dot]kg-1[middle dot]wk-1) was calculated per respondent. The energy expenditure threshold for meeting the IOM recommendation was calculated as 21 kcal[middle dot]kg-1[middle dot]wk-1.

    Results: Of the 162,669 respondents included in the analyses, 29.9% were Nonactive, whereas 42.3%, 23.3%, and 4.5% were Low-, ACSM/CDC-, and IOM-Active, respectively. Median leisure-time energy expenditure values were 9.0, 27.4, and 63.0 kcal[middle dot]kg-1[middle dot]wk-1 for Low-, ACSM/CDC-, and IOM-Active groups, respectively. When using energy expenditure criteria, compliance with the IOM recommendation rose to 27.7% of respondents.

    Conclusions: Compliance with the IOM physical activity recommendation dramatically increased when assessed by energy expenditure compared with conventional criteria, thereby highlighting the potential bias of conventional methods. A significant proportion of adults meet the intent but not the letter of the IOM activity recommendation.